Israel-Gaza war

[GALeftist]

I am obviously overall deeply sympathetic to Palestinian liberation, but I will say that there has been a worrying trend in academia as of late to whitewash Hamas or pretend like they have become less problematic since 2006. I hope that today will end that trend once and for all. You can say that war, especially anticolonial war, is hell and all, and that's true, but it's also clear that the goal of this operation was explicitly to attack civilians, and that is completely unjustifiable. One can only hope that this is at least a step towards their being completely annihilated, and although I weep for the civilian casualties which are likely to ensue in Gaza, I will certainly not shed a tear for the elimination of as much of Hamas as possible.

With that being said, this war must also underscore the need for a permanent solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Blathering on about the complexity of the conflict is nothing more than cowardice that will lead to more deaths. The two-state solution is dead – it's been dead for over a decade now, in fact – but that does not make the status quo any less unjustifiable. The only way this ends is by ending Palestinians' status as a stateless, voiceless, powerless people. Continuing the occupation will inevitably lead to more innocent deaths.

[GALeftist]

As was noted above, saying that the West Bank is the same as Jordan or that the Gaza Strip is the same as Egypt is ahistorical, to put it mildly. Part of what makes this conflict so horrible is that Jordan, Egypt, and frankly every other Arab state hold deeply antagonistic views towards Palestinians, resent those who reside within them, and staunchly oppose accepting any refugees whatsoever.

Another thing I'd like to add is that, although Fatah is obviously preferable to Hamas, they are not the solution here. Not only is their failed leadership greatly responsible for the situation of Palestinians today, but Abbas also runs a deeply oppressive and undemocratic regime in the West Bank. He is not going to solve this problem; he barely even pretends to want to solve it anymore.

[GALeftist]

First of this is completely lol worthy and even if it was true:

Russia>Chechyna

Treating this (or indeed the Chechen Wars) like a team sport or an election is super disgusting. Shame on you

[GALeftist]

The two-state solution is dead and buried. At this point, settlements in the West Bank have grown so large and so numerous that any "evacuation" is unthinkable; Rashida Tlaib was right when she said such a move would be analogous to the Nakba.

[GALeftist]

The Gaza Strip has no future as a political entity.

Its people, regrettably, will need to be evacuated to Egypt and the city of Gaza likely destroyed. If not, the scenes unfolded over the past week will continue for another thousand years.

Israel is not absent of blame of course, indeed they deserve a lot of it, but what has transpired since the partition cannot be changed. We can only look ahead now.

This is genocidal rhetoric. I understand that tempers are running high now, and I truly do understand why, but can we please draw a line somewhere? The median age in Gaza is 18. If you endorse this you are endorsing the forcible expulsion or more likely death of mostly children.

[GALeftist]

The Gaza Strip has no future as a political entity.

Its people, regrettably, will need to be evacuated to Egypt and the city of Gaza likely destroyed. If not, the scenes unfolded over the past week will continue for another thousand years.

Israel is not absent of blame of course, indeed they deserve a lot of it, but what has transpired since the partition cannot be changed. We can only look ahead now.

This is genocidal rhetoric. I understand that tempers are running high now, and I truly do understand why, but can we please draw a line somewhere? The median age in Gaza is 18. If you endorse this you are endorsing the forcible expulsion or more likely death of mostly children.

This is not genocidal rhetoric.

The problem with Gaza is that it's too close to Israel.  It's a thorn penetrating up into Israel's territory.  Israel's racist, genocidal, Nazi enemies use it as a salient from which they have repeatedly, repeatedly, repeatedly launched attacks on Israeli civilians to try and conquer the country and wipe its citizens off the earth.

This is simply a strategic liability for Israel.  Gaza at this point isn't a proper city.  It's a military fort administered by terrorists.  It's the equivalent of saying Cuba should expel the Americans from Guantanamo.  Imagine if North Korea had a military base in the San Juan Islands that they used to constantly launch rockets and attacks on Seattle.  Would it be genocidal to say that the North Koreans should be expelled and the base destroyed?

Gaza is a completely failed city.  It's a sprawling morass of cheap concrete and rebar.  It's not like it's Jerusalem or some city that it's critically culturally important for an ethnic group to have access to.  It is not cultural genocide by any stretch to push the Arabs out of Gaza.

Frankly it would be better in the long run since under Israeli administration it could actually be built into a modern, humane, decent city, with the Islamic cultural heritage (a handful of mosques and gravesites) not only kept intact but preserved and made safe and available for pilgrimage and tourism.  Right now those mosques are used as safe hiding spots for Hamas terrorists, they know Israel won't bomb them because the international condemnation for destroying a cultural site would be too great.

Can you explain to me, please, how it is possible that a "military fort" has a population of 2 million and is, as noted above, about 75% women and children?

[GALeftist]

The Gaza Strip has no future as a political entity.

Its people, regrettably, will need to be evacuated to Egypt and the city of Gaza likely destroyed. If not, the scenes unfolded over the past week will continue for another thousand years.

Israel is not absent of blame of course, indeed they deserve a lot of it, but what has transpired since the partition cannot be changed. We can only look ahead now.

This is genocidal rhetoric. I understand that tempers are running high now, and I truly do understand why, but can we please draw a line somewhere? The median age in Gaza is 18. If you endorse this you are endorsing the forcible expulsion or more likely death of mostly children.

This is not genocidal rhetoric.

The problem with Gaza is that it's too close to Israel.  It's a thorn penetrating up into Israel's territory.  Israel's racist, genocidal, Nazi enemies use it as a salient from which they have repeatedly, repeatedly, repeatedly launched attacks on Israeli civilians to try and conquer the country and wipe its citizens off the earth.

This is simply a strategic liability for Israel.  Gaza at this point isn't a proper city.  It's a military fort administered by terrorists.  It's the equivalent of saying Cuba should expel the Americans from Guantanamo.  Imagine if North Korea had a military base in the San Juan Islands that they used to constantly launch rockets and attacks on Seattle.  Would it be genocidal to say that the North Koreans should be expelled and the base destroyed?

Gaza is a completely failed city.  It's a sprawling morass of cheap concrete and rebar.  It's not like it's Jerusalem or some city that it's critically culturally important for an ethnic group to have access to.  It is not cultural genocide by any stretch to push the Arabs out of Gaza.

Frankly it would be better in the long run since under Israeli administration it could actually be built into a modern, humane, decent city, with the Islamic cultural heritage (a handful of mosques and gravesites) not only kept intact but preserved and made safe and available for pilgrimage and tourism.  Right now those mosques are used as safe hiding spots for Hamas terrorists, they know Israel won't bomb them because the international condemnation for destroying a cultural site would be too great.

Can you explain to me, please, how it is possible that a "military fort" has a population of 2 million and is, as noted above, about 75% women and children?

Gaza is not a military fort that had two million civillians corralled into it by Israel. It’s a civillian city that Hamas turned into a military fort and the largest human shield in the world after they took over in a bloody coup, purged the opposition and instituted a dictatorship. That doesn’t mean any civillian casualties deliberately caused by Israel will be justified; but the people of Gaza wouldn’t be in this situation in the first place if it wasn’t for Hamas.

I agree fully with this, and Hamas is indefensible, as I've said numerous times, but it would not justify expelling so many innocents from their homeland – and, given the realities on the ground, expulsion is frankly optimistic. Egypt is not about to let these 2 million Palestinians into Egypt, and I'd frankly be surprised if they let in 2 thousand. If Gaza is annexed to Israel, its current population will mostly die.

I've seen numerous people assert that "Palestinians in Gaza" support Hamas, so they share culpability for its actions. I have a couple questions regarding this. Firstly, even in 2006, Hamas won less than 45% of the vote – not even a majority. Secondly, as I noted, the Palestinian population is very young – the median Palestinian was three years old when the last Palestinian elections were held. How are we to know whether these Palestinians support Hamas or not? Thirdly, even if a majority of Palestinians support Hamas, one must admit that it is nothing resembling an overwhelming majority. Should the sizeable proportion, if not majority, of Palestinians who oppose Hamas just be condemned to death?

Ultimately Hamas's actions have revealed to all reasonable parties that something must be done. I fully accept that the IDF will have to root out Hamas in Gaza, and I also accept that this will result in civilian casualties. That's the nature of war. What I do not accept is this push for unspeakable crimes to be perpetrated in Gaza by intentionally eliminating its civilian population. I promise you that such crimes would only worsen this horrible conflict.

[GALeftist]

Hamas got 45% of the vote after a serious gesture of goodwill by the Israeli government . After 15 years there stands little to reason that Hamas isn't more popular now .

I'm not so confident. In 2006 Hamas was often seen as a protest vote (even they didn't expect to win), whereas today they are governing in Gaza and have not exactly done a bang-up job.

[GALeftist]

Both Intifadas were explicitly declared by the Palestinians. You can consider them justified attacks -- I think this is totally ridiculous and that even stuff like WW2 had more shades of grey, but whatever -- but it certainly wasn't Israel who launched them.

Genuinely lol'd at this

[GALeftist]

There's no evidence that it happened.  It's from an Anonymous Source that was supposedly told about a conversation (hearsay upon hearsay), and Israel says its disinformation disseminated to divide the country.  The Egyptian claimed something "big" was going to happen in Gaza. 

The information comes from this report by the Associated Press. As a wire service with a strong reputation to uphold, the AP has very strict rules for using anonymous sources and is generally speaking very reliable with this sort of thing (and they certainly have no motive to "divide the country")

I practice law.  An anonymous source is not credible, particularly when they aren't contributing reliable information.  It's hearsay within hearsay.  John told me that Bill told Sam something big is about to happen.   Just cause the AP has low standards for evidence doesn't mean people should rely on it. 

And I never said the AP had a motive to divide the country.  Perhaps the anonymous source had a motive to divide Israel.  That's why we don't rely on an anonymous source in court.  There is no opportunity  to test the credibility of the witness. 

With respect, this is not a court of law, and you are therefore off base. The whole point of the press, including the AP, is that there are good reasons why the public might need information from sources who cannot divulge their identities. In these cases, a credible press organization, such as the AP, the NYT, or WaPo, will “lend” their credibility. A good example of this in action is Watergate, when testimony from someone called “Deep Throat” was rightly deemed credible thanks to WaPo. Absent that testimony, the public would never have learned key details regarding Watergate.

In this case, I suspect that the AP’s source is someone fairly high up in Israeli intelligence, or at the very least corroborated by someone fairly high up in Israeli intelligence. If their identity is divulged, the best case scenario is that they are fired and therefore can no longer act as a source. They and their family could very probably be subject to more serious reprisals, including death. For these reasons, the source might not be willing to work with the AP unless their identity is protected; if this is the case, the public still needs to know this information. Even if the source is willing to use their real name, though, the AP might have (rightly) judged that their utility as a source is too important to compromise.

[GALeftist]

Don't know if this is true, but holy the incompetence if it is.

There's no evidence that it happened.  It's from an Anonymous Source that was supposedly told about a conversation (hearsay upon hearsay), and Israel says its disinformation disseminated to divide the country.  The Egyptian claimed something "big" was going to happen in Gaza.  

I find it ridiculous that this grand planned attack went on invading into Israel, and no one intelligence anywhere knew anything. When this is all over, some Mossad leadership are going to be told by the country's leadership to go find another job. This is CIA 9/11-level intelligence failures by Mossad.

(I've seen one explanation of Hamas have gone to doing everything by courier, avoiding using electronic messaging means at all. Considering how tech-heavy modern-day American and Israeli intelligence are, it's a great way of going underneath if your adversary has no human intelligence. Compare and contrast how the U.S. were telling everyone for months the Russians would invade Ukraine and all their allies thinking it would never happen, compared to not a peep here. If that were the case of Hamas are intentionally not computerized, I would expect Egypt to have human intelligence inside Hamas if Egyptian intelligence was worth ten cents. Even for tech intelligence though, you don't see missiles being moved around?)

I think there are basically two possibilities at this point:

1. The Netanyahu government knew this attack was coming but, in their hubris, believed Hamas incapable of fighting or winning outside Gaza and therefore didn’t take it seriously.

2. The Netanyahu government knew this attack was coming and let it happen.

Normally even I wouldn’t entertain 2 as an option, but the scale of IDF failures in the south is just so catastrophic that it’s hard to imagine an even halfway prepared response failing so completely. I am still leaning towards 1 – one must remember that the settlements in the West Bank are an enormous security liability for the Israeli state, especially given that Israel has been antagonizing the Palestinian Authority as of late, who normally acts as a convenient enforcer for Israel in the West Bank – but I do not think 2 should be ruled out.

[GALeftist]

Don't know if this is true, but holy the incompetence if it is.

There's no evidence that it happened.  It's from an Anonymous Source that was supposedly told about a conversation (hearsay upon hearsay), and Israel says its disinformation disseminated to divide the country.  The Egyptian claimed something "big" was going to happen in Gaza.  

I find it ridiculous that this grand planned attack went on invading into Israel, and no one intelligence anywhere knew anything. When this is all over, some Mossad leadership are going to be told by the country's leadership to go find another job. This is CIA 9/11-level intelligence failures by Mossad.

(I've seen one explanation of Hamas have gone to doing everything by courier, avoiding using electronic messaging means at all. Considering how tech-heavy modern-day American and Israeli intelligence are, it's a great way of going underneath if your adversary has no human intelligence. Compare and contrast how the U.S. were telling everyone for months the Russians would invade Ukraine and all their allies thinking it would never happen, compared to not a peep here. If that were the case of Hamas are intentionally not computerized, I would expect Egypt to have human intelligence inside Hamas if Egyptian intelligence was worth ten cents. Even for tech intelligence though, you don't see missiles being moved around?)

2. The Netanyahu government knew this attack was coming and let it happen.

There's the possibility they deliberately let it happen in order to benefit from a rally around the flag effect, and get a casus belli to get rid of Gaza civilians/Hamas, increase antipathy to the Palestinian cause etc.

Zelenskyy became very popular after Ukraine got attacked because of the rally around the flag effect. There were domestic issues in Israel. It might be that Netanyahu wanted to benefit as well from that.

Again, these are serious things that I don’t want to allege without conclusive evidence, but it’s easy to see the Machiavellian logic, which is why I say it shouldn’t be ruled out. Whether or not Netanyahu intentionally let the attack happen, though, it remains a failure at the highest levels. The Israeli people deserve our support, but the Israeli government absolutely does not except insofar as is absolutely necessary to prevent (or at least mitigate) humanitarian catastrophe

[GALeftist]

There's the possibility they deliberately let it happen in order to benefit from a rally around the flag effect, and get a casus belli to get rid of Gaza civilians/Hamas, increase antipathy to the Palestinian cause etc.

Zelenskyy became very popular after Ukraine got attacked because of the rally around the flag effect. There were domestic issues in Israel. It might be that Netanyahu wanted to benefit as well from that.

That isn't how things work in Israel as a rule: people do rally round the flag, and probably to an even greater extent than normal, but it really is to the flag, to the State and to the idea of the State rather than to the government of the day. If the latter is seen to have failed, people often get very angry with it even as they rally to the flag. Many examples of this historically, and some pretty unambiguous signs now, though I won't predict how that develops further.

That notwithstanding, there are other ways this could benefit the Netanyahu government. Before, Israel would have encountered substantial opposition, domestic and foreign, to a ground invasion of Gaza; now, it likely has carte blanche. The obvious counterpoint is that such an invasion is undesirable from an Israeli perspective, which is true unless your single overriding priority is to stamp out any and all Palestinian political independence.

Again, I think this is less likely than the alternative, and even if true it would obviously not absolve Hamas whatsoever. It freely chose to inflict terror. Just saying this possibility ought not to be ruled out.

[GALeftist]

There's the possibility they deliberately let it happen in order to benefit from a rally around the flag effect, and get a casus belli to get rid of Gaza civilians/Hamas, increase antipathy to the Palestinian cause etc.

Zelenskyy became very popular after Ukraine got attacked because of the rally around the flag effect. There were domestic issues in Israel. It might be that Netanyahu wanted to benefit as well from that.

That isn't how things work in Israel as a rule: people do rally round the flag, and probably to an even greater extent than normal, but it really is to the flag, to the State and to the idea of the State rather than to the government of the day. If the latter is seen to have failed, people often get very angry with it even as they rally to the flag. Many examples of this historically, and some pretty unambiguous signs now, though I won't predict how that develops further.

That notwithstanding, there are other ways this could benefit the Netanyahu government. Before, Israel would have encountered substantial opposition, domestic and foreign, to a ground invasion of Gaza; now, it likely has carte blanche. The obvious counterpoint is that such an invasion is undesirable from an Israeli perspective, which is true unless your single overriding priority is to stamp out any and all Palestinian political independence.

Again, I think this is less likely than the alternative, and even if true it would obviously not absolve Hamas whatsoever. It freely chose to inflict terror. Just saying this possibility ought not to be ruled out.

this is a bit of a simplification but Netanyahu's political support is almost entirely because he can say "I'm the only one who can keep you safe" and enough people believed him -- an illusion that has now been irrevocably shattered

I wouldn't say entirely – a lot of Israelis are just legitimately right-of-center on the issues – but you are right, if this was something they let happen they had to have known it would be catastrophic if/when it got out, which is why I think it's very unlikely. Just trying to wrap my head around the unprecedented scale of the IDF failure in the south. This isn't "we knew something was coming but had no idea how big it would be" failure, this is more like "we were all on vacation" failure.

[GALeftist]

If Israel had known about the attack, their only option would have been to strike first and who would have believed them?

Golda Meir concluded in 1973 that a second pre-emptive strike wasn't the best option.

No, their best option would be to up security and deploy IDF near Gaza, as opposed to the almost no security that actually existed.

Perhaps this would have been easier absent the enormous security commitments that are the various illegal settlements in the West Bank, especially with Israel-PA relations being what they are right now. Food for thought

[GALeftist]

How exactly are Palestinians trapped in Gaza supposed to inform the Israelis of such an attack? Try to get the attention of a bomber flying overhead? There aren't exactly a lot of opportunities for interfaith dialogue in the region.

[GALeftist]

How exactly are Palestinians trapped in Gaza supposed to inform the Israelis of such an attack? Try to get the attention of a bomber flying overhead? There aren't exactly a lot of opportunities for interfaith dialogue in the region.

They have the Internet in Gaza.

"Hello, occupying power, I am a Palestinian writing you regarding an impending military operation by the organization governing my home. In spite of your blockade of my city, which reveals that you do not consider my life to be very valuable, please ensure that my identity does not get back to Hamas, as this might put my family and me in danger of reprisals. Also, notwithstanding the fact that you seemingly ignored Egyptian intelligence on this attack (which was likely provided in turn by a Palestinian double agent within Hamas), please do not dismiss this warning out-of-hand, seeing as it is just coming from some random, in all probability without corroborating evidence. Thanks!"

[GALeftist]

You don't get a 1 free war crime punch card for having endured historical trauma or terror, nor do you get to inflict collective punishment for even the most heinous of crimes. In Syria, the Syrian Democratic Forces repeatedly liberated ISIS strongholds. They were confronted with civilian populations who were in many cases deeply sympathetic to one of the most monstrous groups in human history, a group which had inflicted unspeakable atrocities on them and their countrymen. They still consistently allowed for those civilians to escape the battlefield at great personal risk. I see no reason why Israel ought not to be held to this standard.

[GALeftist]

I'm gonna be real, as someone who wholeheartedly supports Palestinian liberation, I find the constant arguments over the baby beheadings totally counterproductive and really emblematic of the failures of the pro-Palestinian left here. This is just me personally, but I suspect I am not in the minority when I say that I am mostly against baby killing in itself – the issue of whether the babies were beheaded is of comparatively minor importance. Therefore, when I see person 1 go "Hamas beheaded babies" and person 2 go "that's not true, they definitely killed babies, but there's no confirmation of beheadings" I instantly become less sympathetic to person 2. Anyone killing babies is bad and doesn't need to be defended.

[GALeftist]

The formation of the narrow war cabinet means that Smotrich and Ben Gvir will not have a say over major war decisions. Judicial reform will be off the agenda for the duration of the emergency government. Gantz has been bitten before, yes, but this situation is quite obviously different and it seems that he has the maturity to recognize that the survival of the nation is more important than his own ego or personal feelings toward Netanyahu. As I see it Lapid is acting in a way that suggests his own political prospects are a significant motivator, which is disappointing in a national emergency of this scale. It's one thing to demand an emergency government excluding Otzma+RZ (perfectly reasonable). It's much less reasonable to refuse to join a government that contains the people responsible for the intelligence failure - while he is right that the failure is galling, I don't see how having Netanyahu and the current government resign *in the middle of this crisis* will help matters.

[GALeftist]

I've been vocal about my distaste for Hamas and my wish that it be completely annihilated, but how come we don't have people chasing down pro-Israel posters ITT demanding that they denounce the IDF's killings of civilians the same way we have demanded that anyone who supports Palestinian independence denounce Hamas? For all the talk of baby murders, a baby dies whether it's shot by Hamas or bombed by the IDF. Civilian deaths in this conflict are already mostly Palestinian, and it's only going to get worse for Palestinians. And please don't give me the "human shields" crap. It is completely impossible that Israel has enough verified Hamas targets to be dropping 1,000 bombs a day for 6 days now with no sign of stopping. Everyone, even Israel, agrees that this is terror bombing.

[GALeftist]

I've been vocal about my distaste for Hamas and my wish that it be completely annihilated, but how come we don't have people chasing down pro-Israel posters ITT demanding that they denounce the IDF's killings of civilians the same way we have demanded that anyone who supports Palestinian independence denounce Hamas? For all the talk of baby murders, a baby dies whether it's shot by Hamas or bombed by the IDF. Civilian deaths in this conflict are already mostly Palestinian, and it's only going to get worse for Palestinians. And please don't give me the "human shields" crap. It is completely impossible that Israel has enough verified Hamas targets to be dropping 1,000 bombs a day for 6 days now with no sign of stopping. Everyone, even Israel, agrees that this is terror bombing.

Because it would be in as bad taste as hounding American posters about the casualties in Afghanistan in 2001. The attacked party gets leeway the attacker doesn't.

Besides, no one is stalking pro-Palestinian posters demanding they condemn it, because 90% of the pro-Palestinian posters were horrified. They're stalking a select few vile war-crime deniers.

Attackers must still abide by international law. Anyway, estimates for civilian casualties of the invasion of Afghanistan range from 1500 to 2400 deaths over 2 months, and this was a full-scale ground invasion of a country of 20 million, mind you. More accurate analogues would be the Battle of Mosul (5800 civilians killed over 9 months by Iraqi and Coalition airstrikes) and the 2017 Battle of Raqqa (1600 civilians killed by Coalition airstrikes over 4 months). Over 1500 Palestinians in Gaza have died and it hasn't been a week. This is just not comparable to other campaigns, even against the likes of ISIS.

There are definitely some vile pro-Hamas war crime deniers out there, but the fact is that there's an extremely obvious double standard here. There seems to be some agreement that, because of the horrific terror it endured, Israel now gets carte blanche to terrorize Palestinians, international law be damned. Israel can and must be held to a higher standard than this, and I frankly think it's disgusting that it is treated as a reasonable difference of opinion to believe that Israeli actions in this war have all been totally fine. It is not reasonable to defend this conduct, it is reprehensible.

[GALeftist]

Giving one million people--half of them children--24 hours to leave, regardless of what Hamas says, is utterly untenable. Between this and the West Bank being placed under full lockdown it's going to be mass slaughter, and the West will stand and watch as tens of thousands of Palestinians are murdered.
https://twitter.com/nsdoud/status/1712657466721460521?t=5zmBTHX33jGA-dhaYbk-TQ&a...

That's 24 hours more than their government gave Israeli citizens.

Israel is a goddamn nuclear power. It cannot be held to the same standards as a terror group. This is utterly despicable.

[GALeftist]

Giving one million people--half of them children--24 hours to leave, regardless of what Hamas says, is utterly untenable. Between this and the West Bank being placed under full lockdown it's going to be mass slaughter, and the West will stand and watch as tens of thousands of Palestinians are murdered.

The problem with the west is that at the end of the day, words are just words.

And despite all efforts to make our society a more tolerant one towards other races, ethnicities, cultural origins, it all turns moot with inaction like this (or even unconditional support for "Israël to do what it has to do"). I ask myself to what extent an apology to D.R. Congo for our crimes there is genuine from our part, if we continue to turn a blind eye or show support towards similar regimes and actions today.

I've all warned you for this. And the first two days, there were more people calling for me to be banned than something else, but this was my fear and this is why I responded the way I did the first days.

You’re a good person Laki, but because you’re Western you don’t fully get that most of other westerners aren’t like you - there isn’t the intention to make society more tolerant of other races, ethnicities or cultures, there’s the concern about protecting the power and status the West has.

Once you understand and accept that, everything starts making much more sense on why “moral concepts” are so flexible and applied differently depending of the color of the skin or the religion of the involved. When Ukraine War began, much of people’s shock was that “White European people” were dying.

Same thing here, people never cared about doing something for the Palestinians after years of slaughter and land grabbing because they’re darker skinned and Muslim, but in the first bad thing that happens to Israel everyone loses their minds because that isn’t something that is supposed to happen in people’s minds. While the destruction of Palestinians is a project, always has been.

It’s why I always laugh at the cheap fake excuse people give to Ukraine, that doing nothing somehow creates a precedent that validates interventionism lmao. That has already been validated over and over again through time, from Cold War coups to Middle East invasions. The “precedent” exists only to protect the Western countries because for everyone else that sort of thing already happened anyway.

Oh pipe down Red Velvet. This is not the time or place for your inane campist ramblings. The entire world just witnessed a Muslim nation ethnically cleanse a white Christian population with shameful silence from the entire Western world. Please either pick up a book or go comment on some other issue where your lens is less myopic.

[GALeftist]

Calling it Genocide is insane. Israel is planning to invade Gaza and its not common place for nations to tell when they will invade but they are doing so

OSR you are either incorrigibly dim or a willing mark. This is obviously not going to be a normal invasion. Israel is going to raze Gaza to the ground; this is nothing more than a fig leaf.